Posted!

Join the Conversation

Comments

Welcome to our new and improved comments, which are for subscribers only.
This is a test to see whether we can improve the experience for you.
You do not need a Facebook profile to participate.

You will need to register before adding a comment.
Typed comments will be lost if you are not logged in.

Please be polite.
It's OK to disagree with someone's ideas, but personal attacks, insults, threats, hate speech, advocating violence and other violations can result in a ban.
If you see comments in violation of our community guidelines, please report them.

OPINION

OPINION: Syrian refugees no threat, but their kids are

AsburyPark
Published 12:01 a.m. ET Nov. 20, 2015

APSyrian refugees gather near their tent at the Zaatari Syrian refugee camp in Mafraq, Jordan. FILE - In this Feb. 21, 2015 file photo, Syrian refugees gather near their tent after recent stormy weather and snowfalls at Zaatari Syrian refugee camp in Mafraq, Jordan. The Obama administrationâs commitment to taking in thousands of Syrian refugees is raising national security concerns among some law enforcement officials and Republican lawmakers. (AP Photo/Raad Adayleh, File)(Photo: Raad Adayleh / AP)

Tuesday’s announcement by more than two dozen governors that they would reject the resettlement of Syrian refugees in their states was an understandable reaction to the news that at least one of the Paris attackers evidently inserted himself in the refugee stream that entered Europe through Greece. Aside from the dubious constitutionality of what they propose that conflicts with the exclusive federal jurisdiction over immigration policy, is the fact that potential attackers of the United States are already comfortably situated in Europe and are either holding passports that can now get them through U.S. border checks or soon will.

Once asylum-seekers in European Union countries achieve citizenship, they are eligible to secure a coveted passport from an EU member country which exempts the holder from the requirement to obtain a visa. But even if we were to impose such a visa requirement, an EU passport would still be a surer ticket to legal entry into the U.S. than one from any other region of the world. This begs the question of whether our imposition of stringent new controls on EU citizens would cause a serious deterioration of our trans-Atlantic relationships. Such measures, nonetheless, are likely to be proposed in the wake of the Paris attacks.

Paradoxically, a Syrian refugee from a camp in Lebanon or Jordan would be a better bet for admission to the U.S. than a holder of a European passport from a country that has admitted tens of thousands of asylum-seekers with little or no screening. It is possible, in theory, to screen the 10,000 refugees that President Obama has proposed welcoming. It is a time-consuming process, and immigrant advocates have complained about the prolonged wait for clearance, but a thorough vetting once completed, would make a Syrian among the safest candidates for admission to this country. By way of contrast, it is not really possible, even with the best technology, to vet the hundreds of thousands of refugees who have flocked and continue to flock, to the countries of Western Europe.

What makes the threat from terrorists already resident in Western Europe so much more acute for us is that many of them are native-born Frenchmen, Belgians and Germans who enjoy rights as citizens such as due process and also cannot be deported. Moreover, they have access to technologies to cover their electronic tracks that are not likely to be available to a Syrian in a Jordanian refugee camp.

There is a hidden assumption in the arguments of both the governors and the Republican presidential hopefuls that the 10,000 Syrians are all Muslims. That is almost certainly not the case. Some of the earliest refugees were Christians or members of minority sects and Syria, moreover, is probably the most secular of all the Muslim countries in the Middle East. And even if the majority are Muslim, the application of a religious test to immigrants brings up bitter memories of the World War II immigration quotas that limited the admission of Jews suffering from Nazi persecution. The rejection by the United States of those fugitive Jews was, for many of them, tantamount to a death sentence.

If we face danger from a future terrorist attack on our country it is likely to come not from the suburbs of Beirut but from the suburbs of Brussels. The determination of governors to shield their residents from the hypothetical threat from 10,000 Syrian refugees would be better directed to impressing upon their congressional delegations the need to appropriate more money for the screening of visitors to the United States from countries that most closely resemble us in democratic values but who have proven to be an all too comfortable a haven for those whose malicious intentions threaten us all.

Ross K. Baker, a political science professor at Rutgers University, is a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors and the author of Is Bipartisanship Dead? A Report From the Senate.